Did Glock ever make a revolver?

P

Prof Young

New member
Forum Followers:

Near the end of Tom Wolfe's novel Back to Blood, a Glock 9 is referred to as a revolver. Can't find any Glock revolvers via internet research. I'm guessing sloppy detail research on the part of the novelist. Is there even a Glock 9? (I mean, yeah there are a lot of Glock 9mm, but . . .)

I suppose that besides information about Glocks, this warrants a discussion about what novelist get their gun fact right.

Dean Koontz, for one always seems to have his firearm's descriptions match reality.

Life is good
Prof Young
 
Last edited:
There's no real point to the discussion, as a novel is a work of fiction and the author can do or say anything they want, and its all covered because it is fiction. "Any similarity to anything real is purely coincidental"....

I once read a trashy post apocalypse novel where it seemed the writer took a bunch of gun terms, put them in a hat and drew out what ever came up when he needed it. HK 91s (.308) firing "556 tumblers" and Colt Python .44 Magnums were just a few of the things he used.

Even respected writers have gotten things wrong on many occasions . Ian Fleming had 007 carrying his PPK in a Berns Martin shoulder holster.

At the time of his writing, Berns Martin was a noted British holster maker but their product line only had holsters for revolvers. Now, MAYBE they had a secret contract with the Crown to make semi auto holsters for secret agents, but if so, Fleming never explained that....

With movies today its the same thing, if its fiction they can do anything they want, its their story to tell.

There are roughly three levels of honesty in movies/tv shows with historical settings today,.

Actual real events, where they are telling /recreating actual historical events with as much factual accuray as possible

"based on real events" where the main story is reasonably accurate but some details are incorrect, or left out or added from whole cloth "to make a better narrative". Real place names, events and some of the characters are accurate, the rest...not so much

and, "inspired by real events" which is code for "we're making everything up and just using the names of some real people and places"

to the best of my knowledge, GLock never made a revolver, or a pistol that was invisible to airport X-ray machines....
 
Glock revolver? Short answer is nope.

This answer is based almost entirely on reading Glock: The Rise of America’s Gun by Paul Barrett which is more about Glock the man and his company and their marketing practices than it is about Glock the gun. And I really disagree with his using "America's Gun" to describe the Glock.

Also, it’s based on the fact that if Glock ever made a revolver we’d all (all of us here on “The Firing Line”) would know about it. This includes you. So, since you didn’t know about it you are correct the author just made this up and deserves our scorn.

Disclaimer: I am a true believer that the Heritage revolver, with a safety, and the Webley revolver, with a safety were created as a result of a clandestine pact between the firearms manufacturers and the “Mystery Writers of America” so that whenever one of their lazy, firearm illiterate writers writes about “taking the safety off” on a revolver they can claim “Well SOME revolvers DO have safeties”.
 
No Glock revolver that I know of but who knows what is in R&D at Glock Inc? I enjoy reading Mark Greaney and Clive Cussler, they are usually pretty on point with weapon ID's used in their books.
 
There is an absolutely cringeworthy list of prominent authors and hacks that make firearms mistakes. Same for automotive mistakes, motorcycle mistakes, computer mistakes etc. that drive knowledgeable folk in those fields mad too.

Even one of my favorite authors, John Sandford has made the occasional blooper but I still enjoy his books.

I personally think the publisher should have a proof reader on tap that would correct these errors for the authors.

I also subscribe to the conspiracy theory that authors occasionally throw in these bloopers on purpose just to get some "buzz" going about their book.

Here's one about a U.S. Army combat mission:
"[the hero-a U.S. Army soldier] released the safety on his .45, lay flat, and held the revolver in two hands."
 
DaleA said:
Here's one about a U.S. Army combat mission:
"[the hero-a U.S. Army soldier] released the safety on his .45, lay flat, and held the revolver in two hands."
Click to expand...
That just means he brought his Colt Model of 1873 Single Action Army from half-cock to full cock.
evilbanana.gif
 
DaleA said:
There is an absolutely cringeworthy list of prominent authors and hacks that make firearms mistakes. Same for automotive mistakes, motorcycle mistakes, computer mistakes etc. that drive knowledgeable folk in those fields mad too.
Click to expand...

Ain't that the truth. There's a few things that I'm really knowledgeable about motorcycles, computers and guns. I worked in the motorcycle and computer industry industry and I'm a gun junkie... My old lady hates it when I go into a rant about something stupid we've seen in a movie.

Tony
 
thanks for that tipoc, I was unaware of that Glock revolver.

So, I did a little searching about it, and found this..

This is a photoshop done by a member of the website "DeviantArt" in 2011 and has since made appearances on many firearm forums. 100% digital, 100% fake.
Click to expand...

Glock's site doesn't show it, so I still think Glock didn't and hasn't made any revolvers. I might be wrong, but GLock is pretty proud of their stuff (who else claims "perfection"??) so I'd think if they made one it would be on the site.
 
Yep! Glock has never, and does not plan, to make revolvers.

Good experience, or lesson, in identifying true things from fake news. If Glock was planning to introduce a wheelgun I figure they would spend as much money promoting it as they have when they introduced their single stack 9 and their .380. For that matter their .22.

Every gun mag and You Tube gun jockey(MAC, the Yankee Marshal, Hickok 45, etc.) would be talking about it months in advance. But they have not and that's because Glock isn't planning to develop one and so no talk no news.

If Glock built a revolver You Tube would break and the Glock forums would burst into flame.

If they did it would not be in 45 acp.

tipoc
 
As mentioned, novels are 100% fictional. Not history. For example, Mack Bolan would be well into his 70's now. I've read the issue where he was a Sargeant during the Tet Offensive in January of 1968. Then I started guessing as to how old an SF guy would have been.
With movies and TV there's no such thing as 'real'. Even the so called 'based on real events' are highly fictional. How many times have you seen Japanese troopies using Lee-Enfields? Or American Civil War troopies carrying TD Springfields?
The movie/tv makers think real gun shots don't sound real enough too. So every gun shot sound is added in editing.
"...authors occasionally throw in..." More that very few of 'em have ever seen a real firearm.
 
It isn't just the writers who make huge mistakes with firearms. I've always thought that this was the height of ridiculousness.

Steve McQueen in 'Wanted: Dead or Alive'. A TV program from 1958-1961 where he carried a sawed off Winchester '92 or '94 on his hip like a pistol. His 'ammo' for it were 45-70s in loops on his belt.

He could fire off 6 rds in a scene without reloading even though 6 cartridges end to end would be as long as the whole 'pistol', muzzle to buttstock!

51f3pNRTvaL._AC_SX385_.jpg
 
The movie/tv makers think real gun shots don't sound real enough too. So every gun shot sound is added in editing.
Click to expand...

And, they are right to do so. Film and tape simply do not have the capability to capture and accurately reproduce gunshots.

The intensity of the shot sound "pegs the needle" exceeding the capacity of the medium to faithfully record it. So all you get is a loud "pop" on the tape/film, not sounding like what your ear hears in real life.

So what they do is use the sound effects guys skill to mimic what we hear in real life, or as close as they can. Its not often thought of by viewers but a huge percentage of ALL the sounds in the movies are done in post production editing with sound effects. Everything from the creak of a stair tread to the little clink when someone sets a china cup in a saucer, its almost all done after filming, because doing otherwise either drowns out the spoken dialog or turns it into very loud booming voices, due to mic positions and sensitivity.

They don't always get gunshots "right" but they do try.
And yes sometimes they make certain guns sound special and different, for additional dramatic impact. LOVED that part about the Gunsmoke opening, several guys shoot and its bang, bang, bang and when Marshall Dillon shoots its a massive KA-BOOM! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top